Yeah, crazy me saying that I reserved judgement until we had some actual evidence.
What was I thinking?
Sam, is anybody confirming the story in the Tennessee newspaper? Is Condi Rice telling us that a federal judge has uncovered evidence of a Sadam-OBL link? Has the story appeared as a headline on Fox News? Is anybody with the resources to follow up and confirm the story repeating it or holding it up as reliable and trustworthy? Until that happens how can anybody take the story as true? If you do accept it as true based on what we have seen here then you are simply relying on rumor and wishful thinking to form your judgements. If you are advancing this story as a demonstration of the Iraq-Terror link than you are being dishonorable and fraudulent.
Please note the use of the general and indefinite “you,” like the British “one,” as in “If one advances this story…” Out here we would be more inclined to say “A guy might advance this story…,” but I am not addressing an audience that is leaning on a pick-up truck at the cross-roads here.
WHERE did I say that I accepted it as true? Jeez guys, stop jerking your knees for just a few minutes, will you?
My attitude all along has been, “Hmmn. Interesting. If true. I await more facts.”
You think that’s unreasonable? My sole criticism in this thread has been against those people who have declared it a forgery. That’s every bit as silly as declaring it absolutely true.
The fact is, we have one document, and a judge that is convinced by it. I assume that the judge is not an expert on either Iraq or the intelligence community, and may not be in a good position to determine its veracity. But I really don’t know.
So I’m on the fence until it gets proven or debunked. And I believe my position is the only responsible one to take. Do you disagree?
I just did a Google search for “Aswon”, and found this article in the Weekly Standard:
And here is a link to the early Weekly Standard piece describing the same newspaper article, which pre-dates the judge’s receipt of the original list.
I’m still not drawing any conclusions. You asked if there were any other cites corroborating this, so I did a search and this is what I found. You decide whether it adds anything to the debate.
To second what rjung said, and in response to Sam’s query, I called it a “steaming pile of Bushit” because, based on numerous precedents (too many to count, really) the odds are high that that is exactly what it is.
Further hints: as has already been pointed out, this article was written over two weeks ago in a small local newspaper. Haven’t heard a peep since, and I suspect, for the very reasons given, that nothing else will be forthcoming. Further, if the US has/had intelligence that conclusively tied Saddam to 9/11, who here thinks we wouldn’t have heard it by now? And amazing evidence it must be, because it goes against the grain of everything we know about the two.
They should put a sign out in front of the WH that says: “Gone fishing…for legit reasons to Iraq invasion”
Still, if you are so inclined, you’re welcomed to line up spoon in hand. Wouldn’t be the first nor the last time you did.
Ah. Now that actually makes sense. Sam Stone’s link from the Weekly Standard gives the necessary background.
It was published as some kind of half-assed rebuttal to something circulated by the opposition, i.e. “these guys aren’t henchmen, they’re heros”.
No, you’ve got it backwards.
The supposition in the article is that the OPPOSITION ran this list of ‘henchmen of the regime’, and so Uday got hold of it and published it as ,“No, they are HEROES”.
But that theory (which sounds fairly plausible to me) makes the nature of Aswod even more suspect, because it means that the original claim that he’s a go-between between Saddam and al-Qaida actually came from the opposition, and not the regime.
And Uday may have published that name simply because he wasn’t in a position to know whether it was true or not, or because of sloppy editing, or whatever. It wouldn’t be hard to believe that an operation run by Uday would be prone to error.
So if the document turns out to be real, and if (as it appears) the newspaper article did exist exactly as mentioned, that STILL doesn’t mean that this is hard proof that the regime collaborated with Bin Laden. All it means is that a sloppy regime newspaper reprinted a claim by the opposition.
No I haven’t. I mean exactly the same thing that you do. I probably didn’t express it clearly enough, though.
That sounds reasonable to me. You know, given the info made available here.
I also agree that if the Bush admin could’ve made hay w/ the thing, they would’ve by now.
To me this is most discouraging bit I’ve seen here for the hopes of it being a smoking gun.
Sam, don’t take it personally. Please note the disclaimer.
I notice that this version is significantly weaker than the version quoted in the OP. It lists the man as contacting Al Qaida, not coordinating with them. We already knew that Saddam and Osama talked (And that those talks broke down). If this is the correct translation (Which we might know if the actual article was availible), then it’s simply giving a name in an extremely old-news story…
Judge Merritt has been hit with a gag order, and he is pissed!
Why did the CPA do this?
Probably it’s normal bureaucratic behavior. Merritt’s articles were uncontrolled. The bureaucracy acted to establish control over all communication. The corportation I worked for had a similar rule.
There are more Machiavellian theories. Maybe the intelligence community is embarassed because an amateur found important information that they missed. Maybe the Administration suspects this is a fake, and fears that it will lead to embarassment. Maybe this really is a smoking gun, but Karl Rove wants to sit on it*until the election is closer.
I’m confident that someone is checking this story out. I’m less confident that we will learn the results of that check.
*mixed metaphor alert
:rolleyes:
That’s bloody unlikely.
Given the track record to date, given a non-Arabic speaking sucker got fed this conveniently, given the circumstances already cited in this thread, I believe you have the proper candidate. Above all as I have said before, there is no chance Sadaam and al-Qaeda were truly in bed together. Deadly threat to each other.
Rather more worthy of Elucidator.
Shrug.